China's Front Line Fighters

[desimorty]

mind to explain a little bit about this, why? are you suggesting that the SAMs and intercepters are nothing but toys. and far less intercept time is an advantage?

see , i shouldnt have to explain. You should know since you talk..like you know something.
The high altidute in TIbet restricts PLAAF with payload thus fuel or weapons payload. In short the PLAAF has the same problems as the Inaf in Leh.
Tibet is not a good place for S300 sams wince the horizan is high. It is a place for shartrange sams and aa guns, which is what they have, not s300 which are better on flat terrian where they can see further and thus take advantage of its range.

how? the bombers can launch their missile 500-1000km away from the india border. as to the cruise mussiles, yes, some of them will be shot down but not all. and they are so cheap compare to their target's value or even that of the intercept missiles. so mass production is not a problem. on the other hand, it will take time for India to import the intercept missiles if they are still available.

See, you are a troll. You assume the PLAAF has large stocks of long range cruise missiles and think the Indian military is the taliban while you play the states? The Indian military has enough shortrange sams and guns for cruise missiles and the radars to support them. You think cruise missiles are cheap? maybe the ones that dont work...
Your "super" cruise missiles will have to find the target and if they do, it will most likily be a static one at that. Those static targets are protected by their own air defence assets. The pla's best bet is what they train day and night for. Ballistic missiles barrages.
and yes India has stock piles of "interceptor" missiles, they wouldnt need to import.

i think you meant IAF can cut the supply line of tibet, right? and yes, that is possible. the question is a) at what cost and most importantly b)for how long.

and i never said that it would be easy to counter the IAF, what i said was the PLAAF can, despite with some or even heavy casualties. bacause they got the upper hand in logistic and reinforcement.

PLAAF does not have the upperhand in Tibet. The IAF has a 5 to one ratio of airbases compared to the PLAAFs few which are for emergency depolyment of troops. Not entirly for interceptors although they have place few there. The indian air force wouldnt be able to cut off the PLA from Tibet but can harass and slow them down while they make their way to the battle field.
Keep in mind PLA can deploy 3 million troops apparently in Lhasa. Only 100 K if lucky will see the peeks or the actual battle field.

i think you meant "defensive". actually PLAAF knows that too, so no bombers were deploied in Tibet, just intercepters. All bombers will take off from the middle or eastern part of china. and, again, they will launch CMs not BMs.

Of course why didn't i think of that. Of wait I did. How do you think the PLAAF can protect those bombers when they can't even protect Tibet? and whats the point of launching a cruise missile that would fly high to avoid the mountians and then get spotted and shot down?
You are not dealing with a light defence structure. If the PLAAF's cruise missiles do penentrate, they wouldnt be targetting anything WORTH targetting.
Second, Why do you think the PLA has so many short range and medium range BMS?????? have you noticed they are stockpiled?

for how long you can bring the fight to Tibet will depend on how much airport, airplanes and ammos do you left.

Depends on how far. The Indian military can take a single peek, which the Chinese cliam and just sit there a stones through away from India itself while the Chinese would be miles away from the nearest PLA barack.
You seem not understand the concept of what the Indian military has to do to make the pla crawl through hell for peeks that even they probabily dont want for what its worth. Infact the Indian military currently occupies Chinese terriortory. why is that?

PLAAF is not an offensive air force now, she is a defensive air force with certain offensive capability (she has strategic bombers, escorts of the bombers, refuel planes, but not in large quantity compare to US or Russia).

This offensive capability is not there. The only offensive aircraft they have are the Flankers and they are a decade behind in EW equiment. The PLAAF is in the midst of a transformation.

to make things clear 1971 both sides droped bomb at each other
in kargil Pakistan need not to drop bombs at india it was not necessory.. btw we shot down 2 migs

Initial strike from the PAF almost toppled the IAF but eventually when the IAF did start moving they pushed the PAF into a corner. It was so bad the PAF could give proper air defence to the PA and instead went defensive. The IAF OTOH kept bombing only being hampered by the PAF who at times kept harassing them. In the end though the IAF did more to the PA than PAF could do to the IA and that failure became a diciding factor.

ok i hv checked the thread again... and by the look of it Indians dont have any Technological advantage over PLAAF.

Hope this may clear the things up.

They wouldnt need it but they still have the numbers on their front compared to the hampered PLAAF.

Su-MKI RCS:15m^2
J-11B RCS:3m^2
Except the shape looks like Su-30,there are two different aircrafts

Flexibility of aircraft can never catch up the missile,so Su-30mki has no chance to show its mobility;

And India even can't mend the injured Su-30mki,air battle is system VS system, we have own AWACS and multiple satellites,even can attack New Delhi with Rockets

WHere did you get this? a chinese source? Even the russians come up with modest RCS reduction and the Chinese manage to turn a 30 ton plane into a child balloon?
BTW the Su-30MKI doesnt use agility to evade missiles but EW suite. Read up on it. The IAF uses R77 as well.

Sir Jee, the comparison is made with the current IAF and PLAAF not the fututre state of these airforces..

Few technical advanced planes cannot give technoloigcal advanatge over the whole PLAAF

Having the experience, the training to use these technologies certianly gives you a advantage. Keep in mind the IAF was playing around with BVR since the early 1980s and the PLAAF since 1993? while the PAF was doing this only recently.

There is no opportunity for close combat in today's air battle, flexibility is a wrong road for air fighter

In 1996 India tested the Su-30 and found it inadequte for aircombat.

They then purchased the Su-30 MKI with forign collabartions. in short paid for the airframe and eninges while introducing more modern technologies, some of which have ended up on the Typhoon.

as i said before, ACs will take off far away from india, it's almost improssible to cut their supply route.

You dont NEED to cut any supply routes that deep, and the aircraft has no supply ROUTE! they just need airfields and stockpiled weapons and fuel.
The real quesion is, how will the PLAAF challege the IAF for airspace dominance when they have to fly so FAR AWAY?

On a 1-to-1 basis, I do not think there's a clearcut advantage of J-10B, or more propriately J-11B against Su-MKI, and vice versus. They are more or less at the same level technologically. There're many other factors more important in a real fight such as tactics, pilot experiecnes, etc.

Yest they are, except for the EW suite, the weapons and mission computer as well as the Bars radar.
The IAF did operate the Su-30's radar available in the Su-30MKK for a while until they were sold.

China must have beeing working on the equivalent herself because China's national defence is at stake (this is no joke) , since T-50 will be stationed at North border of CHina while F-22A is already stationed at Okinawa - East China Sea.

Thats BS. The Russians want a large share, and the Chinese are going to get Russian technology in their JXX either way.

Unlike Indian counterparts, it's widely acknowldged from the past experiences that PLA senior leaders have almost never openly admited anything if it's not there already; or 100% sure it'll be there very soon(very rarely) . The risk for a PLA leader to act otherwise is extremely high , it's not court martial but severe, they aren't fools.

The PLA operates in secercy, which is not good. No one is accountable for their failures and wastes. The PLA have wasted a lot of resources on research that never amounted to anything.

Under this context, in a shocking rare occation, the deputy chief of PLAAF openly admitted JXX project and "the maiden flight will be very soon", " will be inducted within the next 8-10 years" in China's official national TV channel LIVE interview recently.

If this is true, than they are with out argument, getting russian assistance.

if you said MKI is superior than MKK, i second that. but if you said IAF is superior than PLAAF, sorry, i just can not agree with you.

please take a look on the equation below, it shows that missiles are the most important part. however, IAF knows so little about SD-10 while PLAAF knows R-XXs extremely well.

The Inaf also operates the French Matras which can be used on Falcrums. The R-77s India has they know well. And half the PLAAF flankers use R-77s. and btw, there was an article that stated from Janes that the SD-10 uses a R-77 seeker, which is nothing new. The r-77 is already a near mature technology that can be offered at a lower cost of fthe self.

 

[below_freezing]

see , i shouldnt have to explain. You should know since you talk..like you know something.
The high altidute in TIbet restricts PLAAF with payload thus fuel or weapons payload. In short the PLAAF has the same problems as the Inaf in Leh.
Tibet is not a good place for S300 sams wince the horizan is high. It is a place for shartrange sams and aa guns, which is what they have, not s300 which are better on flat terrian where they can see further and thus take advantage of its range.



See, you are a troll. You assume the PLAAF has large stocks of long range cruise missiles and think the Indian military is the taliban while you play the states? The Indian military has enough shortrange sams and guns for cruise missiles and the radars to support them. You think cruise missiles are cheap? maybe the ones that dont work...
Your "super" cruise missiles will have to find the target and if they do, it will most likily be a static one at that. Those static targets are protected by their own air defence assets. The pla's best bet is what they train day and night for. Ballistic missiles barrages.
and yes India has stock piles of "interceptor" missiles, they wouldnt need to import.



PLAAF does not have the upperhand in Tibet. The IAF has a 5 to one ratio of airbases compared to the PLAAFs few which are for emergency depolyment of troops. Not entirly for interceptors although they have place few there. The indian air force wouldnt be able to cut off the PLA from Tibet but can harass and slow them down while they make their way to the battle field.
Keep in mind PLA can deploy 3 million troops apparently in Lhasa. Only 100 K if lucky will see the peeks or the actual battle field.



Of course why didn't i think of that. Of wait I did. How do you think the PLAAF can protect those bombers when they can't even protect Tibet? and whats the point of launching a cruise missile that would fly high to avoid the mountians and then get spotted and shot down?
You are not dealing with a light defence structure. If the PLAAF's cruise missiles do penentrate, they wouldnt be targetting anything WORTH targetting.
Second, Why do you think the PLA has so many short range and medium range BMS?????? have you noticed they are stockpiled?


Depends on how far. The Indian military can take a single peek, which the Chinese cliam and just sit there a stones through away from India itself while the Chinese would be miles away from the nearest PLA barack.
You seem not understand the concept of what the Indian military has to do to make the pla crawl through hell for peeks that even they probabily dont want for what its worth. Infact the Indian military currently occupies Chinese terriortory. why is that?



This offensive capability is not there. The only offensive aircraft they have are the Flankers and they are a decade behind in EW equiment. The PLAAF is in the midst of a transformation.



Initial strike from the PAF almost toppled the IAF but eventually when the IAF did start moving they pushed the PAF into a corner. It was so bad the PAF could give proper air defence to the PA and instead went defensive. The IAF OTOH kept bombing only being hampered by the PAF who at times kept harassing them. In the end though the IAF did more to the PA than PAF could do to the IA and that failure became a diciding factor.




They wouldnt need it but they still have the numbers on their front compared to the hampered PLAAF.


WHere did you get this? a chinese source? Even the russians come up with modest RCS reduction and the Chinese manage to turn a 30 ton plane into a child balloon?
BTW the Su-30MKI doesnt use agility to evade missiles but EW suite. Read up on it. The IAF uses R77 as well.



Having the experience, the training to use these technologies certianly gives you a advantage. Keep in mind the IAF was playing around with BVR since the early 1980s and the PLAAF since 1993? while the PAF was doing this only recently.



In 1996 India tested the Su-30 and found it inadequte for aircombat.

They then purchased the Su-30 MKI with forign collabartions. in short paid for the airframe and eninges while introducing more modern technologies, some of which have ended up on the Typhoon.



You dont NEED to cut any supply routes that deep, and the aircraft has no supply ROUTE! they just need airfields and stockpiled weapons and fuel.
The real quesion is, how will the PLAAF challege the IAF for airspace dominance when they have to fly so FAR AWAY?



Yest they are, except for the EW suite, the weapons and mission computer as well as the Bars radar.
The IAF did operate the Su-30's radar available in the Su-30MKK for a while until they were sold.



Thats BS. The Russians want a large share, and the Chinese are going to get Russian technology in their JXX either way.



The PLA operates in secercy, which is not good. No one is accountable for their failures and wastes. The PLA have wasted a lot of resources on research that never amounted to anything.



If this is true, than they are with out argument, getting russian assistance.



The Inaf also operates the French Matras which can be used on Falcrums. The R-77s India has they know well. And half the PLAAF flankers use R-77s. and btw, there was an article that stated from Janes that the SD-10 uses a R-77 seeker, which is nothing new. The r-77 is already a near mature technology that can be offered at a lower cost of fthe self.

nope we cannot get russian assistance since we backed out of T-50 and backed out of Su-33 deal. the 5th generation project is something that russians have never even seen before. china has designed planes since 1960's.

the source for J-11B is a wikipedia article on J-11. on any weapon not avaliable for export, the government doesn't actually say much. the news report usually says "we worked hard for this weapon. it took X years for this X person to do it. now it is updated to modern standards." all the info you see about any chinese weapon is either from 1.) the manufacturer, or 2.) western intelligence. on the J-11, it since it is not for export, it is all filtered through the CIA.

 

[Guest]

woo, you qoute so may comments, so i will only reply those wittrn by me.

see , i shouldnt have to explain. You should know since you talk..like you know something.
The high altidute in TIbet restricts PLAAF with payload thus fuel or weapons payload. In short the PLAAF has the same problems as the Inaf in Leh.
Tibet is not a good place for S300 sams wince the horizan is high. It is a place for shartrange sams and aa guns, which is what they have, not s300 which are better on flat terrian where they can see further and thus take advantage of its range.

first part, playload and fuel.
this only show that you know nothing about intercept mission. most of the fighter will be 50% fuel loaded and mount with 4+2 missiles for an intecept mission. so it won't be any problem at all

second, SAMs. from where did you find out that S300 can not be deploied in hi altitude. i seen only tempreture(-40 to +50) and humidity(0-100%) related standard, would you pls provide any source or restricetions about altitude. further more, maybe there is no S300 in tibet, but there are lots of HQ-12,HQ16 in there. do you think S-300 can not be operate in where the HQ-12 can.

See, you are a troll. You assume the PLAAF has large stocks of long range cruise missiles and think the Indian military is the taliban while you play the states? The Indian military has enough shortrange sams and guns for cruise missiles and the radars to support them. You think cruise missiles are cheap? maybe the ones that dont work...
Your "super" cruise missiles will have to find the target and if they do, it will most likily be a static one at that. Those static targets are protected by their own air defence assets. The pla's best bet is what they train day and night for. Ballistic missiles barrages.
and yes India has stock piles of "interceptor" missiles, they wouldnt need to import.

troll? do you know exactly what this word means, or where was i trolling.

about CM numbers. obviously, i don't know how many are there exactly in their inventory. but CMs are much chaper than BMs right, and there are more than 1200 BMs deploied across Taiwan strait. so if you think 1million each is too much for PLA, think again. and do you konw there is a difference between Price Tag and Cost. if you happen to konw some military contractor, ask them, then you will know what i am saying.

PLAAF does not have the upperhand in Tibet. The IAF has a 5 to one ratio of airbases compared to the PLAAFs few which are for emergency depolyment of troops. Not entirly for interceptors although they have place few there. The indian air force wouldnt be able to cut off the PLA from Tibet but can harass and slow them down while they make their way to the battle field.
Keep in mind PLA can deploy 3 million troops apparently in Lhasa. Only 100 K if lucky will see the peeks or the actual battle field.

firstly, pls provide a source rather then only a "5 to one ratio".
secondly, you keep mentioning "cut off". i just want to konw with what?
thirdly, there are only 2.2 million soldiers in PLA, how came 3 million would be there in Tibet.

Of course why didn't i think of that. Of wait I did. How do you think the PLAAF can protect those bombers when they can't even protect Tibet? and whats the point of launching a cruise missile that would fly high to avoid the mountians and then get spotted and shot down?
You are not dealing with a light defence structure. If the PLAAF's cruise missiles do penentrate, they wouldnt be targetting anything WORTH targetting.
Second, Why do you think the PLA has so many short range and medium range BMS?????? have you noticed they are stockpiled?

1) i think this would be my last time answering such questions. your most power radar(stationed or mobile) can see no further then 500kms, so tell me how can you attack those bombers without even konwing where are they.

2) those CMs are terrain hugging and guided with COMPASS systems, they don't need to be flight high. and China has collected 3d maps from all over the world since 1997.

3) how many radars and SAMs india kept in their inventory, each of them can cover no more than 25km(radius). just compare the amount of resource needed and the potential targets.

Depends on how far. The Indian military can take a single peek, which the Chinese cliam and just sit there a stones through away from India itself while the Chinese would be miles away from the nearest PLA barack.
You seem not understand the concept of what the Indian military has to do to make the pla crawl through hell for peeks that even they probabily dont want for what its worth. Infact the Indian military currently occupies Chinese terriortory. why is that?

if you still thinking IAF have the capability to paralysis or cut off the PLA supply, think again. how much IAF is better then the USAF, if they can't achieved that in the korean war, what makes you believed the IAF can do it today. (USAF had air dominant and PLA had no equipment)

This offensive capability is not there. The only offensive aircraft they have are the Flankers and they are a decade behind in EW equiment. The PLAAF is in the midst of a transformation.

first of all, defensive or offensive airforce is not depend on fighters but bombers. "offensive aircraft"? invented by you i guess.

as to PLAAF's capability, may be you should read this. when IAF is equiped with F-22, then may be she will got a kill ratio of 2 to 1.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/55913-do-young-taiwanese-want-reunify-china-3.html

You dont NEED to cut any supply routes that deep, and the aircraft has no supply ROUTE! they just need airfields and stockpiled weapons and fuel.
The real quesion is, how will the PLAAF challege the IAF for airspace dominance when they have to fly so FAR AWAY?

1) what air dominace, and where would it be
2) did you read the post about what i was replying before commenting. no PLAAF ACs are going to challenge the IAF within India territory, only missiles. and if IAF want to challenge PLAAF, they should come into our arena.

The Inaf also operates the French Matras which can be used on Falcrums. The R-77s India has they know well. And half the PLAAF flankers use R-77s. and btw, there was an article that stated from Janes that the SD-10 uses a R-77 seeker, which is nothing new. The r-77 is already a near mature technology that can be offered at a lower cost of fthe self.

seeker? oh by having the seeker (or may be using the missile only) then you will know the frequency, signal coding and decoding, hopping algorithm, intercept trajectory , target recognition pattern etc etc.

French Matras? the one also being used by Taiwan Air Force who later protect against French for leaking the details to calm down China's anger?

 

[desimorty]

nope we cannot get russian assistance since we backed out of T-50 and backed out of Su-33 deal. the 5th generation project is something that russians have never even seen before. china has designed planes since 1960's.

the source for J-11B is a wikipedia article on J-11. on any weapon not avaliable for export, the government doesn't actually say much. the news report usually says "we worked hard for this weapon. it took X years for this X person to do it. now it is updated to modern standards." all the info you see about any chinese weapon is either from 1.) the manufacturer, or 2.) western intelligence. on the J-11, it since it is not for export, it is all filtered through the CIA.

I;ll believe it when I see it.

first part, playload and fuel.
this only show that you know nothing about intercept mission. most of the fighter will be 50% fuel loaded and mount with 4+2 missiles for an intecept mission. so it won't be any problem at all

And what will they be doing with only 50 pc fuel? 4 plus 2 missiles?? what jets are your referring to? either way, you;ll be reducing the payload significantly, it doesnt matter even if it is a bigger aircraft, your still reduce its maximum potential. lets say you get 50 pc less out or an aircraft. Wouldnt that be too little? With half the fuel you'll get no time to actually engage the enemy. Do you think aerial engagement is that short?

second, SAMs. from where did you find out that S300 can not be deploied in hi altitude. i seen only tempreture(-40 to +50) and humidity(0-100%) related standard, would you pls provide any source or restricetions about altitude. further more, maybe there is no S300 in tibet, but there are lots of HQ-12,HQ16 in there. do you think S-300 can not be operate in where the HQ-12 can.

Didnt say anything about high altitudes but the peeks that reduce the vision of the actual radar. Your're obviously a very tall person if no one ever obstructed your vision. Any air defense system that is operated their is short ranged and fast reaction to make the most of the short engagement time available.

about CM numbers. obviously, i don't know how many are there exactly in their inventory. but CMs are much chaper than BMs right, and there are more than 1200 BMs deploied across Taiwan strait. so if you think 1million each is too much for PLA, think again. and do you konw there is a difference between Price Tag and Cost. if you happen to konw some military contractor, ask them, then you will know what i am saying.

The PLA has more BMs deployed than any cruise missile. Most of the current batch of cruise missiles that the chinese have are vintage antiship missiles deployed near the shores. If you had any knowledge about the PLA you would know about their second artillery group.

firstly, pls provide a source rather then only a "5 to one ratio".
secondly, you keep mentioning "cut off". i just want to konw with what?
thirdly, there are only 2.2 million soldiers in PLA, how came 3 million would be there in Tibet.

Roughly 5 to one ratio. I dont need a source. Your grown up to do your own research and think for your self... hopefully. Look at maps of Tibet and India and find all the airbases of the IAF and PLAAF and find the altitude. You'll realize that IAFs airbases are a lot closer to Tibet and the bordar than the PLAAF whos major airbases are in Chengdu.
BTW dont drag the 3 million thing. there was a under lying point.

i think this would be my last time answering such questions. your most power radar(stationed or mobile) can see no further then 500kms, so tell me how can you attack those bombers without even konwing where are they.

2) those CMs are terrain hugging and guided with COMPASS systems, they don't need to be flight high. and China has collected 3d maps from all over the world since 1997.

3) how many radars and SAMs india kept in their inventory, each of them can cover no more than 25km(radius). just compare the amount of resource needed and the potential targets.

Radars don't need to and only awacs technically could see that far. Ever heard of air patrols? And did you know the Americans have a terrian hugging cruise missiles? They've been using them since the 1970s? And if i remember correctly they use to test on every month sometimes twice a month up in north Canada. And China has cliamed to call this terrian hugging since 1997? Fine i'll give this to you but whats stoping short range quick reaction air defence?
BTW the Indian military uses S300. They never bought more. I wonder why?
I dont know why I bother. The PLAAF wont bother doing what your telling me they will either way because the PLA does what the PLAAF can't do it yet.

if you still thinking IAF have the capability to paralysis or cut off the PLA supply, think again. how much IAF is better then the USAF, if they can't achieved that in the korean war, what makes you believed the IAF can do it today. (USAF had air dominant and PLA had no equipment)

DO you know how many Koreans and Chinese died in the Korean war? Its no victory. They achieved such high kill ratios because they did control the sky or a part of it.
And I wasn't talking about cutting off a assembly line but harrasing troops that need to still make it to the battle field. Lhasa to the Indian border. Sound like a easy trip? Imagine precision strike on PLA troops before they even get to the border. It wont be easy.

first of all, defensive or offensive airforce is not depend on fighters but bombers. "offensive aircraft"? invented by you i guess.

Yea, and the pLAAF can't free the skies for those bombers. The air forces primary role is to support the ground troops. The PLAAF would have their hands full trying to keep the IAF off their soldiers.

1) what air dominace, and where would it be
2) did you read the post about what i was replying before commenting. no PLAAF ACs are going to challenge the IAF within India territory, only missiles. and if IAF want to challenge PLAAF, they should come into our arena.

Yea, Tibet. What can the PLAAF do to support the supposed bombers against a forward patrol? Do you know that the IAF and PAF cant even constantly keep the indo pak border constantly monitered?

seeker? oh by having the seeker (or may be using the missile only) then you will know the frequency, signal coding and decoding, hopping algorithm, intercept trajectory , target recognition pattern etc etc.

French Matras? the one also being used by Taiwan Air Force who later protect against French for leaking the details to calm down China's anger?

I'm not going to bother.

The PLAAF is going to be droping bombs soon. They the PLAAF would have their hands full trying stop Jaquars and Mirages off PLA forward bunkers.

 

[desimorty]

One thing i'd also like to mention. Cruise missiles work better with GPS.

 

[Guest]

One thing i'd also like to mention. Cruise missiles work better with GPS.

i would answer this one first. currently, chinese CM's can receive position information from GPS,Glonass and Compass system. you didn't know what Compass is, did you?

 

[Guest]

And what will they be doing with only 50 pc fuel? 4 plus 2 missiles?? what jets are your referring to? either way, you;ll be reducing the payload significantly, it doesnt matter even if it is a bigger aircraft, your still reduce its maximum potential. lets say you get 50 pc less out or an aircraft. Wouldnt that be too little? With half the fuel you'll get no time to actually engage the enemy. Do you think aerial engagement is that short?

i don't want to spend hours talking air combact tatics here with you. so i will cut it short.
1) 50% fuel can last for almost 2 hour depending on which ACs you are talking about. and that would be more then enough for the defender. and if you go back to my previous post, you will know how important it is to reduce the weight.

2) 50km fire one, and then 30-40km fire two before turn into evadation. after the evadation, fire three (if you got the chances, one left) before switching to WRM (2) and then dog fight.

Didnt say anything about high altitudes but the peeks that reduce the vision of the actual radar. Your're obviously a very tall person if no one ever obstructed your vision. Any air defense system that is operated their is short ranged and fast reaction to make the most of the short engagement time available.

which idot would install their radar station amoung canyons rather then open space? and even if they are blocked, what about AWACS. and even without AWACS, can that be define "Tibet is free space" as you mentioned before?

The PLA has more BMs deployed than any cruise missile. Most of the current batch of cruise missiles that the chinese have are vintage antiship missiles deployed near the shores. If you had any knowledge about the PLA you would know about their second artillery group.

how many they deploied, it doesn't matter, and nobody knows. but if thousands of BMs is affordable, i don't see the reason why CMs are not affordable.

Roughly 5 to one ratio. I dont need a source. Your grown up to do your own research and think for your self... hopefully. Look at maps of Tibet and India and find all the airbases of the IAF and PLAAF and find the altitude. You'll realize that IAFs airbases are a lot closer to Tibet and the bordar than the PLAAF whos major airbases are in Chengdu.
BTW dont drag the 3 million thing. there was a under lying point.

all right, as you wish, no more 3 million things. but what about the 5 to 1? i won't bother to findout how many airports do india has, but i know there are about 12-15 active airport within Tibet. so are you suggesting there 60-70 airport on the other side? and each of them house only 1 AC on average (if i didn't get it wrong, 6 squadeorn were deploied there)?

Radars don't need to and only awacs technically could see that far. Ever heard of air patrols?

yes, i heard of air patrols, but an IAF awacs patroling insaide Tibet? forget it!

your awacs's maximum detect range is about 400km, considering they will stay clear from SAM's reach, they will fall back atleast 100km. so they can see no more then 300km into china.

And did you know the Americans have a terrian hugging cruise missiles? They've been using them since the 1970s? And if i remember correctly they use to test on every month sometimes twice a month up in north Canada.

yes, i know. so, the point is?they can did it in 70's then china can't do it in 2000?

And China has cliamed to call this terrian hugging since 1997?

come on, not again. pls go back and read my post again and carefully.
all i said was, they have collecting 3d maps since 1997

Fine i'll give this to you but whats stoping short range quick reaction air defence?

what the hack are you trying to say

BTW the Indian military uses S300. They never bought more. I wonder why?

oh, is it? interesting! so you want some donation?

I dont know why I bother. The PLAAF wont bother doing what your telling me they will either way because the PLA does what the PLAAF can't do it yet.

can some one pls translate this into english for me, thx.

DO you know how many Koreans and Chinese died in the Korean war? Its no victory. They achieved such high kill ratios because they did control the sky or a part of it.
And I wasn't talking about cutting off a assembly line but harrasing troops that need to still make it to the battle field. Lhasa to the Indian border. Sound like a easy trip? Imagine precision strike on PLA troops before they even get to the border. It wont be easy.

you know what, i begin to question whether you can "understand" english or not. all right, i will make my statement simple. if USAF can not cut off PLA's supply, how can IAF do it?

Yea, and the pLAAF can't free the skies for those bombers. The air forces primary role is to support the ground troops. The PLAAF would have their hands full trying to keep the IAF off their soldiers.

of course they can't, how can you free a "free sky" again? and if you want to bomb the PLA army, go ahead. i just want to see how effective they are compare to USAF did in 1999 or 2003-2010. but i'm sure that PLAAF won't do anything stupid as you suggested.

Yea, Tibet. What can the PLAAF do to support the supposed bombers against a forward patrol? Do you know that the IAF and PAF cant even constantly keep the indo pak border constantly monitered?

air dominance in Tibet huh, good thinking and keep dreaming.
"forward patrol"? just like sending you AWACS into Tibet. no definately not. no PLAAF fighter,bomber or other plane pilot would do risk their life for nothing.

 

[smartsyco]

well lemme remind indians if they are thinking to fight against india ..... what happened back in 1963... i hope they won't mind considering it even indians top command of army ........ they should come to the light rather making foolish statements ......

first they need to beat pakistan and the comes china ...... and india can only dream it

 

[RAHUL INDIAN]

well lemme remind indians if they are thinking to fight against india ..... what happened back in 1963... i hope they won't mind considering it even indians top command of army ........ they should come to the light rather making foolish statements ......

first they need to beat pakistan and the comes china ...... and india can only dream it

Off topic and troll....

 

[below_freezing]

india can't even beat the communist insurgents.

if we armed them like the USSR armed communist insurgencies in southeast asia and latin america, maybe tomorrow india and china can be best friends.

the People's Republic of India that is.

 

[RAHUL INDIAN]

india can't even beat the communist insurgents.

if we armed them like the USSR armed communist insurgencies in southeast asia and latin america, maybe tomorrow india and china can be best friends.

the People's Republic of India that is.

...happy..?? now over...now stop trolling...

 

[chinapakistan]

india can't even beat the communist insurgents.

if we armed them like the USSR armed communist insurgencies in southeast asia and latin america, maybe tomorrow india and china can be best friends.

the People's Republic of India that is.

No, that is impossible, they will become The Caste Republic of India.

 

[below_freezing]

No, that is impossible, they will become The Caste Republic of India.

maybe the maoists can help them achieve real socialism. who knows, a strong india on our side is in our best interests, but only maoists can make sure of that.

 

[PracticalGuy]

maybe the maoists can help them achieve real socialism. who knows, a strong india on our side is in our best interests, but only maoists can make sure of that.

yeah right.. just like you did in Nepal?? oh but wait.. where is your "Maoist" Mr Prachanda now? yeah.. begging India to support him... and ever wonder why the "socialist" government failed all of a sudden in less than an year there?? now thats India... you couldnt even pull it off with smaller Nepal and here you are talking about India??
First take care of your muslim majority province..

 

[topjumper]

yeah right.. just like you did in Nepal?? oh but wait.. where is your "Maoist" Mr Prachanda now? yeah.. begging India to support him... and ever wonder why the "socialist" government failed all of a sudden in less than an year there?? now thats India... you couldnt even pull it off with smaller Nepal and here you are talking about India??
First take care of your muslim majority province..

What's wrong with our muslims?